OPM OIG Details Agency’s Failure to Provide Documents in Letter to Congress

In a letter to House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Financial Services and General Government, the Office of Personnel Management’s Office of the Inspector General (OPM OIG) outlined how the central management agency has failed to comply with the laws requiring OPM to provide the OIG with “timely access to agency records.”

As the letter sent on July 22 explains, in May 2020 the House Committee on Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Government Operation requested the OPM OIG conduct an inquiry regarding OPM’s use of direct hire authority. On May 20, 2020, the OIG notified OPM that a special review would occur and requested subject matter expert (SME) points of contact (POCs) to assist with gathering records and answering questions.

On May 26, the Assistant Inspector General for Audits (AIGA) followed up with OPM’s program office further requesting the SME POCs’ contact information. OPM replied that day with apologies and the SME POCs’ contact information.

The following day, May 27, the OPM OIG requested a meeting to discuss procedures for the special review. The OIG also noted that a request for documentation would be due 7 to 10 days after the meeting.

In the days following, the OIG admits there was confusion between the OPM Office of Congressional Affairs and the OIG regarding whether the special review was a “Congressional Request” or an OIG request. On May 29, the OIG clarified this issue with the OPM Office of Congressional Affairs.

On June 5, the OPM OIG held an initial meeting with the OPM program office SME and on June 9 provided the agency with a formal request for agency recordings. A response was requested by June 17, 2020.

The OPM OIG then had discussions with the OPM Office of the General Counsel (OGC) and OPM Office of Internal Oversight and Compliance (IOC) regarding the scope and purpose of the special review.

Following a June 16 email questioning the status of the agency records request, the OPM IOC informed the OIG that the “request is extensive and that they would not meet the original due date of June 17th. Further, OPM IOC informs OPM OIG that they would assess the workload and determine a target date based on other agency priorities.”

The OIG noted in its response that they would accept agency records on a rolling basis as they are available.

On June 29, the OPM IOC informed the OIG that they were working with program offices to coordinate the request, confirmed that the OIG was willing to accept a rolling production, and informed the OIG the office was working to solidify a target date for productions. The following day, the IOC contacted the OIG with follow up questions regarding the records request.

On July 6, the OIG provided answer to the questions and on July 8 requested an estimated timeline regarding the production of the agency records.

On July 9, the OIG informed the IOC that “the OPM OIG is being put in a position of having to notify Congress of the delays. Additionally, OPM OIG informed IOC that the [Deputy Inspector General] and AIGA would be briefing the Acting Director on July 14 about this issue.”

On July 14, the OPM IOC shared an expected timeframe of July 18 and July 24 for providing OPM OIG with the requested documents from the initial June 9th document request. The OIG accepted these dates but warned the Acting Director that should the agency fail to meet the July 17 deadline, a congressional notification would be required.

On July 17 at 6:45PM, the OPM IOC informed the OIG that the agency would not make the production deadline, but claimed the records would be “emailed early next week.”

Representative Gerry Connolly (D-VA), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Government Operations, responded to OPM OIG’s letter on July 22 by stating, “Cooperating with oversight is not optional. The Inspector General is carrying out his responsibility in pursuing this legitimate investigation. OPM must immediately turn over all relevant documents.”

According to an OPM spokesperson, the records requested by the OIG were submitted on July 22.

The letter to Congress outlining this timeline notes the OIG’s concerns that, “The IG Act tasks the OPM OIG with the responsibility to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness within the agency. Timely access to agency records is essential in order for the OIG to perform this critical work. In summary, the agency has missed two deadlines, a month apart (June 17th and July 17th). The OPM OIG repeatedly informed the agency that we would accept a rolling production, yet 35 days later the agency has failed to provide the OPM OIG with any documents.”